L£ ¥5o£ 



5 



P7 



ISO 



LIBRARY OF 



CONGRESS 



028 334 682? 



Hollinger Corp. 
pH 8.5 



LD 4506 
.5 
.P7 
Copy 1 



J'h+r+ttd 



OBJECTIONS 



TO A 



RE-ORGANIZATION OF THE UNIVERSITY 

■ 

CONSIDERED. i/ 



4 + m *■ 



tA BY A TRUSTEE. 



\* 



■«••• » 



Philadelphia, March 21, 1853. 
Hon. J. R. Ingersoll : — 

My dear Sir, — In July last, while you were still Chairman of the 
Committee on the Government of the College, I addressed you a 
letter, in which, as a Trustee and member of that committee, I 
ventured to suggest certain changes in the organization of the 
University. Since your departure from the country, those changes 
have been brought, by the act of the same committee, to the notice 
of the Board. They have also been considered by the able gentle- 
men who compose the Faculty, and their objections have been 
stated in separate papers, which have been printed by order of the 
Trustees. To those objections, and my reply to them, I now ask 
attention. 

From the circumstances under which the letter was written,* con- 
victions which are fixed in my mind as the result of considerable 

* To explain those circumstances, and also to correct a few misprints, the whole 
letter, as it was originally written, is reprinted in the Appendix. 



* 



J *♦ # 4 \ V 



2 

experience and reflection, were set forth very briefly, and in my 
haste I may have used language which further reflection would have 
modified. To you who know me, and who know the terms in which 
I have been accustomed to speak of the Faculty of our College, 
and of colleges generally, it is hardly necessary to say that I am 
incapable of contemplating anything which would be disrespectful 
to them, or to the work in which they are engaged. Exception, 
however, has been taken to the fact that I characterized the present 
race of pupils in our department of arts, as boys — that I spoke of 
the practice of devolving all the teaching in one branch of learning, 
on one instructor, as a monopoly — and that I virtually indicated our 
best academies as sufficient substitutes for the present work* of 
the College. 

The last exception is founded in misapprehension ; I intended to 
institute no comparison between such academies and the College. 
I stated merely a fact which is known to many of us, — which is, that 
some pupils are kept from the University altogether, and others till 
they are qualified for advanced standing, for two reasons — first, 
because at schools and academies, the preparations for recitation, 
as well as the recitations themselves, are superintended in a way 
which is not practiced at the University, and secondly, because in 
the estimation of some parents, most of the branches taught at the 
University are on this account "studied carefully and accurately"* 
at these schools. It did not occur to me that I was conveying the 
impression that the teaching at any academy was, in my judgment, 
as extensive or askable as in the University, for on the same page, 
and within a few lines, I distinctly stated that the teaching of our 
Faculty is better than that at most colleges. But I did mean to 
intimate that, in the case of immature youth, the superior means of 
enforcing attention which a city school has, as compared with a city 
college, may explain why parents should suppose that, even with 
teaching inferior in depth and in range, their children can still make 
sufficient progress in such schools, and can make it with less danger 

* In one of the papers before the Board, these words of the letter are misquoted 
so as to read " taught carefully and accurately." 



to their morals and habits of industry. When adverting to this 
matter, it should not escape observation that the reference com- 
plained of was made by me in endeavoring to account for the fact 
that our number of students is small, and that I desired to do it 
" without impeaching the wisdom or fidelity of the Trustees or of 
the Faculty." In that connection, all I had occasion to speak of 
was the opinion prevailing in certain quarters. As, in referring to 
the High School, I intimated distinctly, my opinion, that the pre- 
ference given to it by many was founded on something other than 
superior or even equal advantages, so it might, and I think ought to 
have been inferred that, in referring to academies, my intentions 
towards the University were equally respectful. When one is 
laboring to vindicate a party, he is not accustomed to prefer charges 
or convey insinuations. 

In regard to the propriety of designating as "boys," such pupils 
as are usually in the undergraduate course of our University ; I 
certainly cannot be tenacious. I prefer that term to "youth' or 
" young gentlemen," partly because it is shorter, partly because it 
is a virtual protest against the precocity too much fostered among 
the young in this country by our habits, and perhaps by our insti- 
tutions, and partly because, to my own ear, it is peculiarly signifi- 
cant of the- inconsideration, impulsiveness, aversion to labor and 
absence of settled purpose, which are apt to mark the period of 
adolescence. In the objections which have been preferred, nothing 
has surprised me more than the stress laid upon the use of this term 
"boys," and its correlate, "men." Can it be supposed that the 
author of the letter to you, or that the Committee that framed the 
by-law, seriously aimed at legislating out of the University, all 
youth under twenty, or even under eighteen years of age. They 
were thinking of things, not of words and names. Hardly any one 
will question that, in the development of ordinary young minds, 
there are two stages, in one of which they need more supervision, 
constraint and external stimulus, while in the other, much may 
safely be left to spontaneous and self-directed activity. The great 
desire of those who propose a re-organization of the University, is 



that this fact should be more distinctly considered,* and that our 
arrangements for colleges should be more precisely conformed to it. 
What terms shall be applied as descriptive of these two stages, and 
at what precise time most young men pass from the first to the 
second, are points about which the Committee on the Government 
of the College have not thought of legislating. 

It is, also, a subject of complaint, that I designate as "mono- 
poly," that which is alleged to be "the only method of teaching 
which the world has yet known." I reply that, to my mind, the 
term monopoly is not, of necessity, a term of reproach. There are 
cases in which the authority to perform a certain act, or the privi- 
lege of selling a certain article, ought to be confined to one flr a 
few persons, and in that case the term is not offensive. I am by 
no means prepared to say, that a city college is not one of these 
cases ; and that where immature youth are to be drilled and trained 
to habits of study, to give them a choice between two or more dif- 
ferent teachers, in the same department, might be as unwise as it 
would be to allow them to. decide, in what order they should pursue 
their studies. The latter right the Faculty of the University pro- 
posed to concede, in a recent instance,f to those less matured than 
ordinary under-graduates ; they, therefore, would be likely to go 
quite as far as I should, in conceding the former. With respect to 
such youth, my notions are conservative, much, probably, ■ beyond 



* " The great and radical defect of the existing collegiate system, he (Dr. 
Chalmers) conceived to be in this, that youths -were taken too soon from school, and 
sent too early to college, and that the college suffered thus by being turned into a 
school." — Chalmers' Life, 3, p. 188. 

f In a plan submitted by the Faculty, for conferring two baccalaureate degrees, 
in addition to that of Bachelor of Arts, which should be adapted to students taking 
shorter courses in literature or science, the following regulation was proposed, — 
" The order in which the studies required for obtaining either of the above degrees shall 
be pursued, is to be at the choice of each student, or of his parent or guardian for 
him, with the advice and consent of the Faculty." It was amended by the Trustees 
so as to read, "the order in which the studies, &c, shall be pursued, shall be under 
the direction of the Faculty " 






the ordinary limit.* When I proposed open instruction as to 
courses, and adlibitive action on the part of pupils as to teachers, 
it was for those only who are sufficiently advanced to exercise 
judgment and self-control, and whose habits and tastes have been, 
in a good degree, formed. If they ought to have the right to elect 
between different branches, or different orders of study, it is not 
easy to see why they are not also entitled to the privilege of a 
choice between teachers, one of whom may be diligent, enthusiastic, 
and accomplished, and the other the reverse. Instead of this being 
an innovation in Universities, it was, for a long time after these 
institutions were established in Europe, the prevailing practice. 
It was so both at Oxford and at Cambridge. The exclusive privi- 
lege of teaching a certain subject within their walls, grew up hun- 
dreds of years after they were founded. It was conceived in a 
selfish, grasping spirit — was promoted in England by the rise of the 
colleges, until its abuses became intolerable, when private tutors 
were introduced, in defiance of law or usage, to correct them. .But 
more of this hereafter. It is sufficient now to remark, that inas- 

* In a report on collegiate education, made in July last, to the Trustees of the 
University of Alabama by its President, Dr. Manly, I find the following sketch of a 
few impromptu remarks, which I had occasion to make about a year previous, at a 
public meeting in Ohio. I may be pardoned for quoting them in this connection. 

" Bishop Potter has been an educator more than twenty years ; part of that 

time as Professor of Moral Philosophy, another part as Professor of Mathematics 
and Natural Philosophy. When called out as President of the Educational Conven- 
tion, assembled at Cleveland, Ohio, in August last, he stated emphatically, as the 
result of all his experience, that the best instrument of forming a man is a classical 
language, the Latin or the Greek, with its appropriate literature. He considers the 
appropriate office of a college to be, to develope the whole man, symmetrically, — 
not the farmer,- the warrior, the professional character, but the man; that the busi- 
ness of the educator is to counteract a tendency in the spirit of this age — a tendency 
which is not in favour of high scholarship, but too violent in favour of what is mate- 
rial and practical ; that we need seminaries involving constraint at first ; that it is 
the business of one wiser than the boy to devise what is best for him ; that we 
should pay more attention to grammar, logic, and the classics ; and that when the 
mind had been furnished generally for self-mastery, the voluntary system of univer- 
sity education should open its brilliant lectures on the sciences upon him, and thus 
complete the course preparatory to commencing a professional career." A more 
extended report of the same remarks will be found in the Appendix. 



6 

much as the word in question is distasteful, I cheerfully withdraw 
it, and express my regret that it was used. 

From points of courtesy and phraseology I pass to questions of 
fact. It is contended, in one of the papers before the Board, that 
I am mistaken in supposing that any considerable number of stu- 
dents go from Philadelphia to other colleges ; and also in referring 
to the plan of a University at Albany as being now on foot. In 
another, it is alleged that I am in error, in stating that some of our 
colleges have proposed to allow students to choose what studies they 
shall pursue. The plan suggested in the by-law and letter is also 
represented, as being a proposition to transplant a European Uni- 
versity to this country, and as evincing great misconception of the 
nature and constitution of such Universities. In this connection, it 
is intimated that the proposition overlooks those facts which make 
it necessary for a German youth to pass from the gymnasium to 
the philosophical faculty of a University — that it takes no account 
of the meagre number, after all, of those who do thus connect them- 
selves with that faculty,* and overrates altogether the extent of 
the competition in teaching, which such Universities encourage or 
allow. These imputations of incorrectness are made or intimated 
in peremptory terms ; — I will consider how far they are just. 

1. " There is another misapprehension which may be noted 
briefly ; it is that the number of Philadelphia students in other 
Colleges is considerable. This is by no means the case." Answer. 
I have before me the catalogues of four Colleges, of which but one 
(Princeton,) has as many as two hundred students ; the number in 
the four being but four hundred and forty -three. Of this number 
forty-tivo, i. e. all but one-tenth of the ivhole, are reported as of 
Philadelphia, viz : 14 in Princeton, (N. J.,) 13 in Lewisburg, (Penn.,) 
10 in Burlington, (N. J.) 5 in Newark, (Del.) Now there are, in 
the United States, about one hundred and thirty Colleges ; if four 

* This number -would not have been rated so low, if the following fact, stated by 
Prof. Robinson, had been remembered. "Every student in theology is also in this 
Faculty (Philosophical), and in addition to his theological studies, is required to 
attend lectures on logic, metaphysics, ethics," &c. Is not the same true of medical 
students, in respect to chemistry, &c. ? 






of them contain forty-two pupils from our city, is it to be pre- 
sumed that " the whole number of Philadelphia students in all of 
them is inconsiderable" ? 

It should be observed also that these four Colleges embrace none 
that have been established by Lutherans, by German Reformed, by 
Roman Catholics, by Methodists, or Friends, nor, with one excep- 
tion, any which, like Harvard and Yale, attract students from a 
distance by their ancient reputation and ample resources. I con- 
ceive, therefore, that I shall be fully justified in reiterating the words 

of my letter. " There are other Colleges where parents 

are induced to place their sons from various considerations of 
taste, convenience, religious feeling, or personal and traditionary 
attachment." 

2. " The Albany project referred to in the letter 

proved impracticable, and was abandoned." Answer. — If this be 
so, the citizens of Albany are not aware of it. In the course of 
this winter, two meetings, composed of literary and scientific men 
from different parts of the country, whose travelling expenses were 
paid by the citizens of Albany, have been held already at that 
place, and a third is contemplated. An Association entitled a 
National University Association has been formed, and plans for a 
National University are solicited. I will not prolong this letter 
by extracts from several documents on the subject, which have been 
issued during the past winter, and which are in my possession. 

3. " Another mistake in the document on which I have been 
animadverting, is that which is expressed with respect to other 

Colleges, on its third page, where it is said that they 

'are endeavoring to increase the number of their students by 
allowing them to choose what studies they will pursue and for how 
long a time. The experiment, as applied to immature youths, such 
as offer themselves for admission to- a city College, seems to me to 
be hazardous. At that age young men are hardly competent to 
make a proper choice.' "I must be greatly mistaken if, in any of 
our Colleges young men are permitted to select a course of study 
for themselves, &c." Answer. — In the printed statement of the 
University of Virginia, for 1849-50, on page i3, are the following 



8 

words : " Every student is free to attend the schools of his choice, 
and no other than he chooses; with the condition that he shall 
attend at least three professors, &c." In the exposition by the 
President of Brown University, of the principles on which that 
Institution is reconstituted, are the following words : " The vari- 
ous courses should be so arranged that in so far as is practicable 
every student may study what he chooses, all that he chooses, and 
nothing but what he chooses. The Faculty, however, at the request 
of a parent or guardian should have authority to assign to any 
student such courses as they might deem for his advantage." In 
the University of Rochester, recently established in the State of 
New York, the same provision exists substantially, and according 
to the report of Dr. Manly,* already referred to, it has obtained 
more or less in ten or twelve other Colleges. The plan reported 
by the Faculty of Arts in the University of Pennsylvania within 
the last fourteen months, and adopted by the Board with modifica- 
tions which did not touch this point, is thus described by the Com- 
mittee (J. R. Ingersoll, G. M. Wharton, T. Wagner,) to whom it 

was referred : "It contemplates a separation in many 

cases of the different departments of instruction from each other, 
and a corresponding option on the part of the student to attend one 
or more courses only," $c. 

4. "The letter proposes for actual adoption what many a scholar 
had already dwelt upon as a pleasing day-dream, the transfer of a 
European University, (according to the author's conception of 
it,) to our own country." " There can be no doubt that he intended 
to ground his recommendation (of free competition in teaching) 
really upon the supposed practice of the Universities of Germany." 
" It may simply be said that such is not the rule nor the operation 
of any rule of the German University system, however anomalous 
that system may be." Answer. — The letter contains no reference 
whatever to European Universities, except in points which are pe- 

* This document, the fruit of an extensive tour among the Colleges of the United 
States and of much laborious and careful research, is a most valuable contribution 
to the cause of a higher education. 



9 

culiar to those of Great Britain. It grounds its recommendations, 
expressly, on two admitted defects in our own existing College- 
system, and on the opinion I had previously expressed that remedies 
which have been proposed for those defects will prove insufficient. 
Had the remotest allusion been made to a German University there 
might have been some reason for this appeal to a morbid patriotism 
and to a supposed dread of German influence. As this is not the 
case, the suggestions of the letter may claim to be tried on their 
merits and by general principles. I readily admit that our Colleges 
and Universities should be essentially American; but I cannot 
allow that a feature, because it belongs to an Institution in Europe, 
ought therefore to be excluded from one in the United States. 
What is good in itself and not incongruous with our position or 
wants may well be reproduced in a country which is not too proud 
to learn, and which has been able, thus far, to assimilate to itself 
elements gathered from the most various quarters. 

Not only is the attempt to transfer a European University im- 
puted — the imputation is coupled with the charge of ignorance in 
respect to the state of higher education in Europe, and especially 
in Germany. If the recommendations of the letter had been 
founded on an assumed acquaintance with University education in 
Germany, there would have been relevancy in this course of remark. 
The fact is otherwise ; no knowledge of the kind is arrogated, and 
I had occasion, but a few weeks after the letter was written, to 
avow, in public, my convictions that such knowledge was much 
needed generally in this country.* I wish it were in my power to 
refer to the two papers before the Board which open this question, 
as indicating on the part of the writers a thorough acquaintance 
with a subject so little studied. Positive assertions are indeed 
made ; but in scarcely an instance which I have had occasion to 
examine, are those assertions borne out by facts. 

For example : In both these papers it is directly affirmed, or 
distinctly implied, that nothing except the classics or philology is 

* See the Opening Address before the American Association for the Advancement 
of Education, at its second annual meeting held in Newark, N. J., August, 1853. 



10 



taught in the German Gymnasia. " To complete his education 
bj acquiring the most necessary mathematical and scientific know- 
ledge, the English and German youth must resort to the Uni- 
versity. But American graduates have already acquired the same 
mathematical and scientific knowledge at our Colleges." If you 
have Professor Bache's able and searching Report on the State 
of Education in Europe at hand, you will find, by turning to page 
491, &c, of that work, how wide this assertion is of the truth. He 
selects three Prussian Gymnasia — two in Berlin and one at Pforta 
— as representatives of the instruction given in that kingdom pre- 
paratory to the University course. The whole scheme of study for 
all the classes, in each Gymnasium, is presented in parallel col- 
umns. I turn to those of the highest class, and I find that, out of 
thirty hours, eleven are given to Mathematics, Physics, History, 
Philosophy and Religion in one of them, thirteen in another, and 
eight in another. In other words, the teaching, instead of being 
exclusively philological or classical, is — more than one-third of it- 
devoted to mathematical and physical science, with History, Philo- 
sophy and Religion. Instead of being compelled to resort to a 
University "to get the most necessary knowledge" of this kind, 
the pupil in two of these German Gymnasia studies nearly if not 
quite as much mathematics as in our University, and makes respect- 
able proficiency in Physics, Physical Geography, Mechanics and 
Chemistry. In that which concedes the least time to science (Pforta) 
he is taken into Conic Sections, the Diophantine Analysis, Trigo- 
nometry, General Physics, Magnetism, &c. 

Again, it is maintained that in the Universities of Germany, Pro- 
fessors and teachers studiously avoid — and are required by the theory 
of their system to avoid a real competition in teaching. But this is 
not the testimony of those who have thoroughly investigated the 
subject. Prof. Robinson, after passing some years in study in the 
Universities of that country, published, on his return home, two or 
three papers on their organization and courses of instruction.* He 
gives the programme of Lectures, for a season, in Theology ; and in 



Biblical Repository, vol. i., 1831. 



11 

turning to it I find that Tholuc and Wegscheider were both to 
lecture at Halle at the same time on the Four Gospels, and also on 
the History of Doctrines — that at Berlin, Neander, whose Chair 
was that of Ecclesiastical History, was lecturing at the same time 
with Yon Gorlich on the Gospel of Matthew. If there be an 
authority in our time on the subject of University Education, it is 
undoubtedly Sir Wm. Hamilton, of Edinburgh, who has given to it 
much of his unsurpassed acumen and power of research for more 
than twenty years past. He thus describes that feature in the 
German (Protestant) Universities which we are now considering : 
" In Germany a Professor had no monopoly of subject ; he could 
lecture on any branch belonging to his faculty, though that had 
been previously selected by a colleague ; and the same could every 
other Professor, ordinary or extraordinary — indeed any qualified 
graduate of the faculty, do by him : indeed no exclusive privilege 
was accorded to any course."* And again, f " In the Universities 
of Germany, the graduate retains Ms privilege of academical teach- 
ing, for it is only requisite that he should farther write and form- 
ally defend what is called a "Dissertatio ad locum," to enable him 
to lecture at the University on any subject within the compass of 
his faculty, and to have his course or courses announced in the 
" Series Prelectionum." The opportunity thus afforded to all 
graduates of publicly manifesting their learning and ability, as 
teachers, is, with the admirable system of academical patronage, a 
main cause of the uniform excellence of the German Protestant 
Universities, as organs of information." 

These illustrations might be extended, but^I am unwilling to pro- 
tract discussion, in regard to points which may seem incidental. 
The proper understanding, however, of several of them is neces- 
sary, in order to master the facts which bear on the main question ; 
it is necessary, moreover, if we would know with what degree of 
care statements are hazarded. — I pass to the proposed reorga- 
nization and the objections to it. 

* Discussions on Philosophy, Education, University Reform, &c, p. 679. 
f Ibid, p. 686. 



12 



In order, to a proper appreciation of the merits of the proposed 
plan, it is important, indeed absolutely essential, that we separate 
the main question, which underlies the whole subject of College and 
University education, from all accidents or accessories. Most of 
the criticisms which are advanced in the papers now before the 
Board, are either founded in misapprehension, or are directed 
against features of the plan, to which only secondary importance 
is attached. The great question raised by the letter, and intended 
to be raised by the proposed by-law, is met in but one of these 
documents,* and in that but briefly. This question refers not to 
what young men, as they are now educated, may desire or be seek- 
ing, — though on that point I differ widely from some of the views 
presented. The question is not whether " an increasing class of 
young men, after graduation," " suggest and call for courses of 
non-professional studies to be superadded to our actual College- 
courses." [That must be a strange conception of the duty of educa- 
tors, of Trustees and Professors of a University, which would have 
them wait till young men suggest and call for courses of instruc- 
tion, as if it were the duty of students to lead and of Colleges to 
follow, and as if it should be our only object to ascertain — not what 
such students need, but what they wish.~\ The true question, as I 
conceive, — and it is one which cannot be disregarded with wisdom 
or safety, is this : — Do not the interests of higher education, and 
as dependent upon it, the interests in this country of science, of 
erudition, and of true culture generally, require that young men 
should have at one stage of their training, more of that thorough, 
accomplished and enthusiastic drill, which induces accuracy, taste, 
power of thought and desire for knowledge, and at a later stage, 
more advanced teaching, with more range of choice between 
different teachers and studies, and more powerful stimulants in the 
way of prises and distinctions ? 



* I refer to the letter of Professor Frazer, whose candor and courtesy might 
have been imitated by some of his colleagues, without disadvantage to themselves 
or to the interests of truth and charity. I was in error in stating in my July letter, 
that Professor Frazer was one of those who had united with Agassiz, Bache and 
others, in the Albany enterprise. 



13 

From the beginning to the end of that indefinite period, which 
intervenes between the school and professional life, should there 
be but one and the same system of training and instruction, or 
should the system change as faculties are developed, and tastes and 
habits are formed ? On this question it would be instructive to 
have the matured opinions of experienced Professors. If they 
recognize the importance of some such gradation in methods, but 
are dissatisfied with the plan proposed, it would then be most 
useful if they would assist in elaborating some other system, which 
would be likely to meet our wants. Difference in details can easily 
be arranged, if there be a common and an earnest purpose. 

In respect to the plan proposed in the by-law, and very briefly 
explained in the letter, which is printed with it, I repeat that in 
more than one of these papers, it is misapprehended in all its 
essential features. For example — 1. This plan does not contem- 
plate the destruction of the present department of Arts in the 
University, nor even its absorption, — at least for the present — into 
the higher department proposed to be formed. 2. This plan does 
not contemplate making the principal Professors dependent exclu- 
sively, on fees from pupils. 3. This plan does not propose to put 
" by the side of each Professor another Professor in the very same 
department, whose services are not otherwise required but who 
is to stimulate his colleague by running an opposition against him, 
in the business of selling tickets," "his stimulator being required 
to go on in the same order, with the same books, of the same 
course." 4. This plan does not propose to displace Professors 
from their right to examine their own classes. 5. It does not 
propose to draw students for the open University course exclu- 
sively, from among the graduates of Colleges. 

It would be difficult, I think, to extract even from the letter- — if 
it be read with the eye of charity — one of these obnoxious propo- 
sitions. It will be still more difficult, if from the letter we pass to 
the by-law, which contains the only provisions for which the sanc- 
tion of the Board or the approbation of the Faculty has been 
invoked. Let it be observed here, however, even of the by-law, 



14 



that it was brought before the Board simply as a basis for discus- 
sion. It was not, in all respects, satisfactory to those who pro- 
posed it, but was presented as the readiest way of bringing the 
subject to the early notice of the Trustees and Professors. 

1. The plan does not propose to destroy the present Department 
of Arts in the University. Those, who have looked into the origin 
of the University, know that, in the first instance, it was merely an 
Academy. In establishing the College, the Academy was not 
superseded or merged into it, but was still retained — and so when 
the College assumed the still more ambitious title of University. 
As the Academy continues, so would the College, even though the 
proper work of an open University were undertaken, — unless the 
Trustees should see reason to suspend it. Whether such suspen- 
sion would be expedient, and whether, if expedient, it could be 
effected without a violation of the charter are questions, to which 
I shall advert hereafter. In the mean time, it is sufficient to repeat 
here the opinion expressed in the letter — that the collegiate depart- 
ment is not likely to be large, and that the establishment of open 
instruction of the highest character — on the principles of a Uni- 
versity proper, would be likely to attract many more students, and 
on this as well as other accounts, would become the more important 
part of our work. If aided by accomplished tutors, to do the drill 
work of the classes, the present Professors might superintend the 
studies of the College, as now taught, and yet have a large portion 
of time to devote to other and higher instruction.* 



* " The truth is, that greatly more than half the distinguished authorship of our 
land (Scotland) is professorial ; and till the present generation, we scarcely remem- 
ber, with the exception of Hume in Philosophy and Thompson in Poetry, any of our 
eminent writers who did not achieve, or at least germinate, all their greatest works 
while laboring in their vocation of public instructors, in one or other of our Univer- 
sities. Nay, generally speaking, these publications were the actual product of their 
labor in the capacity of teachers, and passed into authorship through the medium 
of their respective chairs. Whatever charges may have been preferred against the 
methods of University education in Scotland, it is at least fortunate for the literary 
character of our nation, that the Professors have not felt, in conducting the business of 
their appointments, as if they were dealing altogether with boys. To this we owe the 



15 

2. The plan does not propose to make the Professor dependent 
exclusively or mainly upon fees. The letter makes no reference to 
the subject of fees, nor does the by-law, except as it recognizes the 
issuing of tickets by professors. At present, part of the salary is 
contingent on the number of students, i. e. on the amount of labor 
performed. The by-law does not propose to disturb this arrange- 
ment. It is complained of, however, as an arrangement without 
precedent and without justice. In respect to precedent, it may 
suffice to observe that this mode of payment has prevailed for 
twenty years in the College of which I was formerly an officer — 
that it prevailed in Harvard University as long ago as 1838 — that 
it obtains at this moment in Brown University — in the Protestant 
Episcopal Academy of Philadelphia, &c. In respect to its injus- 
tice, it is difficult to see why that principle of compensation which 
is applied in four-fifths of the pursuits in life — in the medical, 
legal, and, to some extent, even in the clerical profession — which is 
the only principal recognized now in the Medical and Law depart- 
ments of the University itself — it is not easy to see why this prin- 
ciple should be entirely excluded from the department of arts ; 
nor is it easy to understand why all professors should draw the 
same pay, when the services of one may be worth four-fold or ten- 
fold those of another ; nor again, why the same professor should 
not command additional compensation, in proportion as his ability, 
zeal and reputation increase. " More work and more pay " (within 
certain limits) says President Manly in his able and most conserva- 
tive report already noticed : "More work more pay" (within cer- 
tain limits) " is a good method of attracting able and faithful offi- 



manly, and original, and independent treatment, which so many of them have bestowed 
on their appropriate sciences, and by which they have been enabled to superadd one 
science to another. They have not only taught Philosophy ; they have also both 
rectified its doctrines and added their own views and discoveries to the mass of pre- 
existent learning. They in fact have been the chief agents in enlarging our country's 
science ; and it is mainly, though not exclusively to them, that Scotland is indebted 
for her eminence and her estimation in the republic of letters." 

Chalmer's on Literary and Ecclesiastical Endowments, as quoted in his Life. 



16 

cers — the great requisite of a good College." [The italics are his, 

not mine.] Says Sir Wm. Hamilton (Discussions, p. 692) 

" It is not necessary — it is not, indeed, expedient, that the emolu- 
ments of an academic place should be uniform by whomsoever 
filled. For thus, one individual would obtain comparatively more, 
another comparatively less, than he deserves. Thersites, in a divi- 
sion of the booty, would share equally with Achilles. Each instruc- 
tor should, therefore, as far as possible, receive only what he equi- 
tably merits, and what he is relatively worth, his emoluments, of 
course, rising with his reputation, and as he may approve himself 
of greater value to the institution ; for the evils are not less from 
raising mediocrity than from depressing excellence. This is the 
principle fairly and fully acted on in the German Universities. 
Heyne, the illustrious veteran, drew ten times the salary of Heyne, 
the promising junior professor ; and though in these there be not 
any academical monopoly, no one is appointed to the difficult and 
important office of public instructor, who has not publicly mani- 
fested his competence to instruct. In this island all is the reverse. 
We pamper ignorance and starve learning. An income perma- 
nent, and merely determinate, is connected with each academical 
place ; to this place comparative merit with no certainty regulates 
the appointment ; and the most lucrative places are, in general, 
those opened to the commonest qualifications. With us, Thersites 
obtains a far larger share of the booty than Achilles." 

3. The plan does not propose to place " by the side of each pro- 
fessor another professor in the very same department, whose ser- 
vices are not otherwise required, but who is to stimulate his col- 
leaguer by running an opposition against him, &c." Let these 
words be confronted with those in which the 3d section of the pro- 
posed By-law is actually expressed. " The Board of Trustees has 
the right, in the exercise of its discretion, to select two or more 
Professors or Teachers for any particular branch of instruction, 
leaving it optional with the student to take the ticket of one or 
other of said Professors." On what principles of interpretation can 
such language be translated into that which professes above to be 



17 

its equivalent ? This section does not require the Trustees to appoint 
more than one Professor to the same branch of instruction ; it 
merely permits them to do it in the exercise of their discretion. It 
does not require that the second professor shall be of the same 
grade or rank with the first ; he may be merely a Teacher without 
salary and without rank other than that of being a graduate with 
license to teach, and he may be dependent entirely on fees. It 
does not require that he shall stimulate his colleague by running 
an opposition to him, going on in the same order, with the same 
books of the same course. It would authorize their teaching to- 
tally different books in Latin or Greek — delivering independent 
and dissimilar (though equivalent) courses in History, Science, and 
so on. The sum and substance of the provision is, that the Trustees 
may, at their discretion, introduce within the University a princi- 
ple which is now in full operation in almost every calling — which 
obtains not only in the Continental Universities of Europe, but 
partially in those of England also — and which, in Germany, is re- 
garded as the chief secret of their eminent activity and success. 
The plea, that it might promote ungenerous rivalries may apply to 
such exaggerations and perversions of it as I have noticed above, 
but it does not apply to the form which it took in their minds 
who framed the proposed By-law. Judiciously conceived and 
gradually and carefully introduced, it would be likely to substitute 
here — as it has done in Germany* — open and generous competition 
for the paltry feuds and puerile jealousies which too frequently disturb 
the peace of our Colleges now. It would assume that Professors 
(ordinary and extraordinary) are not less open to manly motives, 
nor more liable to unmanly ones, than the members of the legal pro- 
fession, where competition is found to promote fraternal feeling ; 
and it would furnish a stimulus through life, which the retirement 
of Colleges needs, and in which ingenuous minds and true hearts 
might well rejoice. 



* See on this subject D wight's Travels in Northern Germany ; also, Prof. Robin- 
son in Biblical Repository, vol. I. 



18 

I have already stated that this principle, instead of being novel 
or exclusively German, was originally engrafted on all the universi- 
ties of Northern Europe, i. e., on all those which were modelled 
after the University of Paris. Sir Wm. Hamiltonf thus describes 
the primitive system and its advantages. "In the original consti- 
tution of Oxford, as in that of all the older Universities of the Pari- 
sian model, the business of instruction was not confided to a special 
body of privileged Professors. The University was governed — the 
University was taught by the graduates at large — Professor, Mas- 
ter, Doctor were originally synonymous. Every graduate had an 
equal right of teaching publicly in the University the subjects com- 
petent to his Faculty and to the rank of his degree." "He had 
also, (p. 392,) the right to exact from his auditors a certain regula- 
ted fee. "While this continued, ability possessed an 

opportunity of honorable manifestation ; a nursery of experienced 
teachers was afforded ; the salaried readers (i. e. the stated Profes- 
sors,) were not allowed to slumber in the quiescence of an unfrin- 
gable monopoly ; their election could less easily degenerate into a 
matter of interest and favor ; while the student, presented with a 
more extensive sphere of information, was less exposed to form 
exclusive opinions, when hearing the same subjects treated by dif- 
ferent lecturers in different manners. These advantages have been 
by such an arrangement, secured in the German Universities." 

4. The plan does not propose to displace the Professor from his 
right to examine his classes. It charges the Board with the duty 
of appointing Examiners ; but it does not exclude Professors from 
receiving the appointment. It certainly does not recognize a right 
de jure in the Professor and his pupils such that "he has a right to 
examine his own class, and his class have a right to insist on being 
examined by him." If this be an inherent right in Colleges, it 
would seem to be inherent also in Academies, and in courses of 
professional study. The Principal of the Grammar School, then, 
must have a right to examine his own students when they apply as 
candidates for admission into the College or University, and the 

■j- Discussions, p. 391. 



19 

students must "have a right to insist on being examined by him." 
The lawyer and physician in whose offices and under whose instruc- 
tion candidates for their respective professions have studied, must 
have a right to examine their own students when they apply for 
license to practise, and those students must " have a right to insist 
on being examined by them." If it be an impeachment of the 
integrity of the teacher, in any one of these cases, that he does not 
possess and exercise, as of right, the office of examiner, so it must 
be in all. The prerogative, here claimed, is unknown wherever 
university education has attained to any distinguished excellence. 
Its exercise in the Universities of Scotland is made the subject of 
special complaint in the Report of the Royal Commission of Visita- 
tion, appointed by a conservative British Cabinet in 1830, and it is 
regarded by Sir Wm. Hamilton as an essential cause of the defec- 
tive education imparted there. Say the Commissioners, "It has 
appeared to us to be essentially necessary, that the examinations 
for degrees in arts should be conducted, as at Oxford and Cam- 
bridge, by examiners appointed for the purpose, and not by the 
Professors." 

When the candidates are examined by the Professors, there is 
always the greatest risk that examination will degenerate into a 

mere form. The character of the Professors will be 

engaged in the success of the candidates. The experi- 
ence which has already occurred as to the Scotch Universities 
demonstrates the truth of these remarks, and affords conclusive 
reasons for apprehending that the value of the degree will not be 
raised if the examination of candidates should be left in the hands 
of the Professors," &c* 

In contrasting Oxford as it might be with Oxford as it is, Sir 
Wm. Hamilton describes a system of teaching and examination to 
be carried on through the Colleges under the efficient supervision 
of the University. And in speaking of preliminary and ordinary 
examinations, where the pupils trained in different colleges are 
brought to be examined in common, he lays down this principle : 

* Hamilton's Discussions. &c, pp. 626-628. 



20 

"No tutor (i. e. regular College tutor,) should examine his own 
pupils. Tutor and pupil should in fact be separated in all relative 
to academical honors ;" and again, in speaking of a new statute 
about to go into effect at Oxford this spring, he says, " the very 
constituting of interested parties into the official arbiters of dis- 
tinction would be decisive of the new 'Triposes.' In every Uni- 
versity where such impolicy has been followed, as, indeed it too gen- 
erally has, degrees and academical honors have there become con- 
temptible." Again, page 644, "The recommendation now made to 
introduce (in Edinburgh) other examiners for a degree beside the 
academical lecturers, is no anomaly, is no innovation. It is in fact 
a return to principle — to the custom of all academical antiquity, a 
return even to the practice of the University of Edinburgh itself, 
to wit, in its first bestowal of medical degrees." 

5. Finally, this plan does not propose " a university for gradu- 
ates," — does not propose to depend for a supply of students exclu- 
sively or mainly on those who have passed through the department 
of arts, as now constituted in our own and in most other colleges. 
Nothing in the By-law gives color to such a construction, and the 
reverse is evident from such passages in the letter as the following. 
It claims for " those who have previously been well disciplined, or 
who exhibit a strong bent towards specific studies, an opportunity 
to pursue those studies much farther than any college now takes 
them, and with more or less reference to active professional pur- 
suits."* Again, "I have a deep conviction that we need (and that 
time and experience will soon demonstrate it,) the open university, 
where young men older and better trained than our ordinary col- 
legians, with more active desire for improvement can resort — where 
graduates of our colleges and other young men bent on gaining 
knowledge, can resort and have the teaching of the best masters.' 

The existence, in our country, of a great and rapidly growing 
class of young men, not graduates, who are active, ingenuous, 
aspiring, the offspring of our improved public schools, of our inde- 
fatigable press, of our industrial emergencies and our free institu- 

* Such, in addition to the legal and medical professions, as engineering, architec- 
ture, manufacturing, practical geology, agriculture, and the arts of design. 



21 

tions, — this class may escape the notice of academical functionaries, 
or be made the object of their misplaced and discreditable irony.* 
They are not unknown or unnoticed by the world without. Their 
intellectual yearnings crave and will have consideration, and any 
college or university which professes to despise them, will soon 
meet with the retribution it deserves. The introduction of such 
young men into Universities where they could stand side by 
side with college graduates, and rehearse the contests with 
them which will soon be had on the arena of life, is an event 
not to be deprecated ; everywhere it ought to be encouraged ; 
above all, in a country which glories in its social and politi- 
cal equality. That those who indite such criticisms cannot com- 
prehend what they, who are destined to industrial pursuits, can 
have to do with liberal courses of instruction, is not surprising. 
The alliance between science and industry, one of the most notable 
facts of our time, is ignored among the sybarites of a cloistered 
literature, who would scourge back to mindless drudgery or random 
adventure, those whose lot indeed may be labor ; but who hunger 
and thirst for knowledge, with an appetite which rebukes many a 
child of affluence. To wonder what manufacturers, mechanicians, 
architects, engineers, agriculturists, can have to do with science 
and liberal culture, is but to imitate the mournful inconsideration 
or the still more mournful arrogance which has well nigh ruined the 
Universities of England. In this country no worse omen, for the 
future of our Colleges and Universities, could present itself than a 
settled and deliberate purpose on their part to offer affront to aspi- 

* They are alluded to m one of these papers, in the following terms : " Another 
set, who have already decided to devote their powers to some mechanical trade or 
other industrial pursuit, are to be conducted through some peculiar system of 
studies or exercises, of the character or worth of which I am not competent to form a 
judgment or even a conception." " What they have to do with fellowships, or fellow- 
ships with them, I am quite unable to conceive. And unless these industrial 

students are to have a set of courses entirely to themselves 

with a distinct corps of professors, advanced instruction must acquire a new mean- 
ing, or one set of a professor's hearers must be unable to comprehend what he says, 
the other set will comprehend indeed, but despise, and remain untaught." 



22 

rations, which prevail more and more over the world, and which 
merit respect as they will command success. 

In Yale, Harvard and Union Colleges, and in Brown University, 
attempts have lately been made to supply these wants. They have 
met with the most encouraging success. The Lawrence School, 
recently established at Cambridge, received (according to Dr. 
Manly,) seventy-five students during the last current year ; and 
Professor Gillespie, of the Engineering department at Schenectady, 
reports (also according to Dr. Manly,) that those who come for a 
special course as University students are generally excellent in every 
respect — that their number for a year or two past has been very 
very greatly increasing, and that most of them would not enter at 
all, but for the liberty of taking such special courses or at least of 
dispensing with classical study. If such results have been attained 
at Cambridge and Schenectady, where there are few facilities for 
practical illustration in manufacturing establishments, and in States 
too whose mineral and industrial resources are not to be compared 
with those of Pennsylvania, might not much more be anticipated 
from vigorous measures taken in the same direction by a University 
in Philadelphia ? 

The Trustees of our University have a deep stake in its welfare. 
They are charged w T ith serious responsibilities touching its funds 
and courses of instruction, and with responsibilities hardly less 
serious, in respect to the general interests of education in this 
country. Their character as individuals and their position in life, 
furnish a guarantee that they will lay no rash hands on the existing 
order of things. The relations of the Committee on the govern- 
ment, to the College are still more intimate ; and such names as 
William M. Meredith, Benjamin Dorr, Tobias "Wagner, George M. 
Wharton, would seem to be a pledge, that any changes which they 
may finally press for adoption, will be carefully conceived and 
well digested. It was understood in the Committee, I am told, 
(I was absent at the time) that no final action of the Board was to 
be asked, till the subject had been thoroughly discussed and the 
means found for giving pecuniary eifect to any new plan which 
might be generally approved. Modifications in the proposed By- 



23 

law — more or less essential — were anticipated ; and if they approved 
themselves to the judgment of the members of the Committee would 
have received their prompt and cordial support. 

The essential features of the plan, as proposed, are the following : 

1. Higher and wider instruction. 

2. This instruction adapted to graduates and to other young 
men who have, either a marked capacity and taste for general study, 
or a strong bias towards special studies, or a desire to gain some 
theoretical and scientific preparation for such pursuits as mining, 
manufacturing, (whether chemical or mechanical,) engineering, 
architecture, &c. 

3. Instruction in the different courses open to any student who 
is competent to pursue them. 

4. Such measure of competition in teaching as may be compa- 
tible with the dignity and greatest efficiency of the profession, and 
most conducive to the reputation and usefulness of the University. 

5. More rigid examinations. 

6. More powerful stimulants to study, operating both on those 
within the University and on*those preparing to enter it. 

After drawing so largely upon your patience, I will add but a 
few remarks. Of this proposed plan for reorganization it may be 
asked, — 1. Is it legal f 2. Is it desirable ? 3. Is it 'practicable f 

1. Is it legal f It is contended, that the substitution of manly 
for juvenile pupils would be an infraction of the charter, which 
designates the education of youth as the object for which the uni- 
versity was incorporated and endowed. Answer 1. The By-law 
proposes no limitation as to age. 2. The charter and endowments 
were given, in the first instance, for an academy. If adding a 
college, and giving instruction to pupils proportionably advanced in 
age, were no breach of trust, would the further addition of a uni- 
versity proper be so ? 3. The term youth, as employed in the 
charter, must apply to any young man, of whatever age, who is in 
statu pupillari ; otherwise, the charter must have been violated, in 
every case in which an under-graduate was over twenty-one years 
of age. 4. This term (youth) has already received a construction 



24 

more liberal than the one contended for ; (a) When the Board has 
granted to Professors in the Faculty of Arts the use of the College 
Hall, free of charge, for courses of lectures, to be addressed mainly 
to adults ; (5) When it has allowed to the Professors of Law, Natural 
History, &c, a similar privilege in respect to their pupils. 5. The 
charter has been already several times amended, and in points not 
less material, in order to adjust it to new emergencies ; a further 
amendment, if needed in order to accomplish an important purpose 
in the interests of higher education, would hardly be refused by the 
Legislature. The first step towards founding the University seems 
to have been taken by Dr. Franklin, and is thus described by himself. 
There being " no provision for defence nor for a complete education 
of youth, no militia nor any college, I therefore (in 1743) drew up 
a proposition for establishing an academy." Not succeeding then, 
he revived the scheme some years later, published proposals relating 
to the education of youth in Pennsylvania, signed " a public spirited 
gentleman" and secured the co-operation of leading citizens of Phi- 
ladelphia. Funds were obtained, in the shape of annual subscrip- 
tions, for five years — a charter for & The Academy of Philadel- 
phia' was procured — and thus, says Franklin, "was established 
the University of Pennsylvania."* Franklin continued to be a 
trustee for more than forty years, and within that time saw his 
academy developed into a college, and taking to itself the name of 
University. If this development took place rightfully, then it may 
be assumed, that one more step in the same direction — one addi- 
tional provision for securing a complete education in Pennsylvania 
— one more effort to adjust the institution to the growing wants of 
our time and land — may be legalized, without being condemned as 
a breach of trust. 

2. But is the proposed reorganization needed — is it desirable f 
It undoubtedly is not, if the present condition of higher education 
in this country be what wise and good men are satisfied with, and 
what they ought to be satisfied with. But is this the case ? The 
public or common school system has, within twenty years, gained 

* Franklin's Life, by himself, pp. 132, 136, Harper's Family Library. 



25 

immensely, both in efficiency and in influence, over the public mind 
— is it so with academies and colleges ? The college system has 
expanded, but has it materially increased in power and value ? Its 
base has been greatly widened, has it risen in altitude in equal 
proportion, or in proportion to the i;eal wants of the case ? We 
have colleges in sufficient number, and between them there is quite 
enough of a certain kind of rivalry ; but is the kind and quality of 
training which they impart all that we desire, or all that we have a 
right to require ? No one knows better than I do the great worth 
and ability of many of our professors throughout the country, nor 
believes more thoroughly that, as a body, they are doing all that 
under the present system can be expected ; ' but is that system one 
that ought to satisfy large-minded and enthusiastic members of the 
profession ? If the demand for such education as colleges now give 
does not increase in equal proportion with our population, is it to 
be assumed that the fault is exclusively with the people, and not at 
all with the institutions ? May not the following at least be re- 
garded as serious, yet not irremediable defects : — 1. The want of 
rigid examination ; 2. The want of higher and more powerful in- 
citements to study, in the way of prizes, scholarships, &c. ; 3. 
Instruction deteriorated, by attempting to teach too many things in 
a short time ; 4. Want of provision for more advanced instruction, 
such as is furnished in the best European universities ; 5. Too little 
incentive for exertion and improvement among professors ; 6. Too 
little opportunity for the most distinguished of them to meet in the 
spirit of fraternal co-operation. 

These difficulties — almost inseparable from the present state of 
things — will not readily be removed, except through examinations 
much more searching and thorough — through prizes and distinctions 
for eminent scholarship much more valuable — through studies more 
restricted in College because much more extended and systematized 
in real Universities beyond them — more open competition for the 
highest chairs, and more of earnest, generous rivalry among their 
incumbents. These desiderata, if not attained, would at least be 
sought under the plan proposed for reorganizing the University ; 
and the very attempt would be useful both to our own institution 



26 

and to others. At certain seasons of the year, the University 
might, in addition to its regular Professors, gather the most emi- 
nent Professors from other colleges and institutions to lecture for 
a short time on their favorite branches — thus securing through the 
inspiring influence of their presence and teaching, their own mutual 
improvement and enjoyment, and the essential advancement of 
the influence and fame of the University under whose auspices they 
should meet. 

That higher courses of instruction are not only required, but 
wished for, is proved by the attempts which have been made within 
the last few years — for the first time* — to institute them, so that 
both graduates and other properly qualified students may not only 
be allowed to reside at Colleges, but may have their studies actively 
and regularly superintended. In one of our Colleges,! it is pro- 
posed to devote a very large sum to this specific purpose ; and at 
Yale and Harvard, where the experiment has been already made, 
the results are encouraging. Indeed, no one, it seems to me, 
can go to our medical schools- in the winter, and see that they are 
frequented by practitioners of medicine from remote places, who 
leave active and often extensive practice to come here and pass 
months in the work of self-improvement — no one can travel among 
our people and see how many young men everywhere are thirsting 
for means of instruction (specific or general), which are not now to 
be had, without feeling that profound indifference to liberal and 
scientific culture is not their most flagrant sin. Let us first pro- 
vide the appliances for such culture — if they are not used, we shall 
then be authorized to denounce the young men of the United States 
as destitute of all proper aspirations. 

3. Lastly, Is such a reorganization of the University practica- 
ble f It is freely admitted that a mere reorganization on paper is 
entitled to no consideration. Of measures of that kind, we have 
had perhaps more than enough already. To enlist the earnest sup- 
port of the enlightened and liberal men of Philadelphia — of those 
who are now her most influential and useful citizens — the Uni- 

* Until very recently no regular studies have been provided for resident Graduates 
at any College. f Union. 



27 

versity must present a commanding object, and one that adapts it- 
self clearly and boldly to our acknowledged but hitherto unsup- 
plied wants. Large funds — the sympathy and co-operation of 
the alumni — the good will of the controllers of our public schools 
— the favor of the legislature and people of the Commonwealth — 
all would be needed. And all can be had. There is in Philadel- 
phia a wide-spread and generous desire that the University should 
be worthy of the memory of its illustrious founder and of the pros- 
perous fortune and active enterprise that surround it. The munifi- 
cence with which her people sustain free schools, and tfce noble 
liberality with which individuals have endowed the Academy of 
Natural Sciences and other kindred institutions, demonstrate that 
they can give, when there is occasion, with unstinted hand. 
Throughout the Commonwealth, too, there is a growing conviction 
that its vast material resources — its almost unlimited mineral and 
agricultural treasures would be worked to much greater advantage, 
if that science — which has co-operated so effectively and benignly 
with productive industry in Philadelphia, under the auspices of the 
Franklin Institute — were spread from the Emporium through the 
teeming hills and valleys of the State. Everywhere, also, in the 
Teachers of our Public Schools, there are those who would gladly 
borrow light from Academic Halls, and who — as they are cheered 
and encouraged by our Colleges or frowned upon — will prove to be 
their best friends or their most dangerous foes. 

I take my leave of this subject for the present. Other cares 
and duties claim all my time, and the disfavor with which the pro- 
position is regarded by those whose cordial co-operation would be 
essential to its success, does not encourage to persistency. The 
suggestions which I ventured to make, were conceived in a spirit of 
sincere good-will, not only towards the University and the cause of 
Liberal Education, but also towards the Faculty. Were some such 
plan well matured and prudently, yet resolutely, inaugurated, it 
would do much, I am sure, to render their position more lucrative, 
more independent, and more honorable. All the habits and sym- 
pathies of my life urge me to serve the profession to which, for 
more than twenty years, I belonged. But I cannot believe that he 



28 

does it service who claims that its members shall be subjected to 
no supervision — excited to exertion by no stimulus. Some of the 
views presented in these papers seem to imply that the Faculty are 
the proper masters of the University — the Trustees only its pecu- 
niary stewards. While, at one moment, the Faculty are spoken of 
as likely to be corrupted by the most unworthy considerations ; at 
another, they are represented as quite above all vulgar infirmities, 
and as needing none of the incitements to enthusiastic exertion 
which are required by the rest of mankind. In my judgment, the 
best an(fr wisest plan of improvement will be that which frankly 
assumes that Professors are men of like passions with others — who 
need neither more nor less of " dictation, inspection and stimulus" — 
who hold their places not for their own benefit, but for that 
of the public — and who should invite the strictest scrutiny into 
their proceedings if it be not unfriendly, and hold themselves to 
the strictest accountability if it be only just and righteous. 

It is claimed, that measures of reform or improvement ought to 
originate with the Faculty — I cheerfully admit it ; and I express, 
I believe, the opinion of every Trustee, when I say that they would 
much sooner follow than lead in such a work ; and that nothing 
would be more acceptable than to receive from the right quarter, 
suggestions which should be adequate to our emergencies. It is in 
no captious spirit, and with a full and cordial recognition of the dis- 
tinguished merits of individual members of the Faculty of Arts, 
that I refer to the notorious fact, that with the present condition 
of the department no one is satisfied. The Faculty themselves are 
not satisfied. The Trustees are not satisfied. The public is not 
satisfied. The population of Philadelphia has doubled within the 
last thirteen years ; it finds the number of undergraduates not only 
not doubled, but not even increased — nay, it finds that number less 
at the present moment than it has been at any time within twenty 
years.* And, instead of a salutary and powerful influence from 

* The smallest number from 1830 to 1850, was eighty-three (in 1837,) ; the pre- 
sent number is eighty — of whom nine are designated as irregular students. 

The average number from 1830 to I860 was over one hundred; from 1847 to 1853 
it was eighty-eight. 



29 

our University on the classical schools of the city, the teachers of 
some of the best of those schools are wholly mistaken, if that influ- 
ence be not deleterious and debilitating. 

In concluding this letter, permit me, my dear sir, to express the 
hope that your engagements may not altogether prevent you from 
studying the crisis through which the venerable Universities of 
England are now passing. The result of your inquiries may be of 
essential service, when we have the pleasure of once more seeing 
you among us. There is, by no means, the same occasion for an 
academical crisis in this country. But the waning influence of our 
Colleges, and the various attempts at reconstruction which we -see 
around us, afford significant intimation that some material changes 
are needed. May we not hope, that they will be rendered gradual 
and safe, by the co-operation of those who have most personal stake 
in their success, and whose experience and education best qualify 
them for the work. I have approached the subject with reluc- 
tance ; I shall gladly see it assumed by those who have more ooth 
of leisure and ability. That mere resistance will avail is not to be 
expected. There is a tide in the affairs of men. It may be disre- 
garded ; it may be denounced ; but it still flows on, and they only, 
who will consent to watch its progress and trust themselves frankly 
and without fear to its swelling flood, shall make it a source of 
honor to themselves, and of blessing to their country and to man- 
kind. Were I in a position which authorized my addressing the 
friends and functionaries of American Colleges generally, and of 
our University in particular — as one whose heart is thoroughly 
with them, as far as they are with truth and the true interests of 
high culture — who feels that the preservation of our College sys- 
tem, properly amended, is one of the most important objects which 
can occupy the thoughts of an American patriot and philanthropist, 
I would say to them, in words not unlike those recently addressed 
by Mr. Gladstane to his constituents the University of Oxford, 
at a visit which he paid there immediately after his last election : 

"The health of the Chancellor of the Exchequer having been 
drunk, he rose, and supporting himself with a stick on account of a 



30 

temporary lameness, returned thanks in a speech of considerable 
length. After expressing his profound gratitude for the education 
he had received at Oxford, and for the new obligations which he had 
recently incurred, he intimated a wish, if it were not trespassing 
too much upon his audience, to say a few words on a subject of 
great interest to all those then present — the improvement of the 
University. (A general murmur of applause invited him to pro- 
ceed.) In looking back on the history of our Universities, he 
thought it would be found, that from a very early period they had 
generally done their duty in taking the lead in the advancement of 
the English mind. But the progress of that mind, now, was not 
only rapid, but rapidly accelerated ; and there were points in which 
he thought that the advances made by the University were behind 
what the nation had learned to expect, and public opinion to 
demand. He considered that there was a body of men in Oxford 
in whom the country had confidence ; but that the retaining of that 
confidence depended much on the course now taken by the Univer- 
sity itself. There were resources — pecuniary, moral and intellec- 
tual — which were not brought to bear on the proper work of the 
University ; and he trusted that all would co-operate in the endeavor 
to justify themselves in the eye of the country by making the best 
use of their means for the advancement of education. If the Uni- 
versity would do its duty in this respect, especially by extending its 
advantages to more of the classes it now receives, and to as many 
as may be practicable of other classes, who partake less of its bene- 
fits at present, he felt that the country and the Parliament of 
England would maintain its independence. But the continuance 
of public confidence depended on the course now pursued by the 
University. For himself, however he might fail of his duty as its 
representative, it could not be for want of an affectionate regard 
for its interests." 

Ever, Dear Sir, 

Yours faithfully, 

A. POTTER. 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



028 334 682 1 



limniMB C0NGRESS 

028 334 682 'T 



u~n: *«. r. 



